# In re Hernandez

> District of Columbia Court of Appeals · October 10, 1996 · 683 A.2d 764

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4953200

## Case

- **Full name:** In re Carlos M. HERNANDEZ, A Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals
- **Court:** District of Columbia Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** October 10, 1996
- **Citations:** 683 A.2d 764; 1996 D.C. App. LEXIS 209; 1996 WL 581863
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Judges:** Pryor, Reid, Wagner
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4953200

## Opinion text

PER CURIAM.
The Board on Professional Responsibility recommends that respondent be disbarred pursuant to D.C.Code § ll-2503(a) (1995 Repl.), in light of his conviction in the Municipal Court of the State of California, State v. Hernandez, No. 95CF1397 (June 26, 1995), on six counts of forgery, twenty-two counts of knowingly passing checks written on insufficient funds, and six counts of embezzlement in violation of California Penal Code §§ 470(a), 476(a) and 503. We accept the recommendation, which respondent did not contest.
A felony in which intent to defraud is an essential element is inherently a crime of moral turpitude. In re Juron, 649 A.2d 836 (D.C.1994). Embezzlement involves moral turpitude. In re Venable, 641 A.2d 853 (D.C.1993). Since the crimes respondent was convicted of are inherently crimes of moral turpitude, respondent must be disbarred. D.C.Code § ll-2503(a).
Accordingly, respondent is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in the District of Columbia, effective immediately. See D.C. Bar R. XI, § 14(f) (1996).
So ordered.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4953200. Public record. Not legal advice.